How an Iconic Star Wars Character was Brought Back to Life in Rogue One

This article includes spoilers for Rogue One!

 

Director Gareth Edwards spoke about how he brought back to life one of Star Wars’ most iconic characters in Rogue One: A Star Wars Story with Radiotimes.com this week. Read on for more.

 

Peter Cushing, the actor who played Grand Moff Tarkin in the original Star Wars film has returned to the big screen via the wizardry of the Lucasfilm-owned digital effects house Industrial Light & Magic. Cushing, who died in 1994, was literally brought back to life by re-animating his facial likeness over another actors face that bears a similar resemblance.

 

 

Tarkin, plays a significant role in the first Star Wars spin-off movie directed by Gareth Edwards, so the creation of a believable CG human was needed in order to fill crucial gaps in the story line.

 

“It was a lot of blood, sweat and tears from [special effects and animation studio] Industrial Light and Magic,” Edwards told RadioTimes.com of Cushing’s return.

 

 

Edwards went on to explain, visual effects supervisor John Knoll had a different approach to the presence of Tarkin in mind. Knoll, who was the person to pitch the Rogue One story to Lucasfilm expressed utter confidence in creating a full CG human face. So, they basically went all in and ran with the idea.

 

“John was always like ‘no we can do this, we can do it, we can do it,’” the director recalled. “He was very confident, and we… you know, to be honest, a lot of people were nervous the whole time, like ‘is this gonna happen?’ And then we went all or nothing in.”

 

 

Now,  all they needed was someone to play the younger Grand Moff Tarkin so that they could bring Cushing’s version of the character back. Edwards enlisted a fellow whose involvement had been circulating round Rogue One for some time – actor Guy Henry. You probably remember this report (here) which is now fully confirmed.

 

“It was played by an actor called Guy Henry [above], who’s in Holby City, and he was amazing,” Edwards revealed. “It was a massive thing for him, it was very gracious of him, because essentially he’s doing this big performance and getting zero credit for it,” Edwards went on. “He was gonna be totally replaced, and then had to keep it all secret. So, um, that was a big ask.”

“I mean ideally, you get the original actors to play these roles, but it’s been 30-odd years since then, and so it’s impossible,” Edwards explained.
“People have aged so much that you can’t even get them to do the motion capture. As you get older you’re not the same, your whole body language is different. “And so, we had to cast specific actors to play them. And there was an audition process for all of that as well.”

 

Rogue One: A Star Wars story is in cinemas now

 

 

+ posts

130 thoughts on “How an Iconic Star Wars Character was Brought Back to Life in Rogue One

  • December 17, 2016 at 5:37 pm
    Permalink

    The effect was good enough that its time had come. The test is if someone who never Star Wars knew it was fake.

    • December 17, 2016 at 6:36 pm
      Permalink

      My wife thought the guy was alive, so I guess it passed

      • December 17, 2016 at 11:10 pm
        Permalink

        My dad, too.

        • December 18, 2016 at 6:21 pm
          Permalink

          My brother and mother as well.

    • December 18, 2016 at 12:25 am
      Permalink

      It was time to test it, which is ironic because Tarkin was there to test the Death Star.

      • December 18, 2016 at 1:00 am
        Permalink

        They wanted to demonstrate the full power of CGI

        • December 18, 2016 at 2:39 am
          Permalink

          Strange right, who would waste the opportunity to create the practical effect by blowing up a city… Everything should be practical.

          • December 18, 2016 at 6:21 pm
            Permalink

            “Real sets, practical effects”

  • December 17, 2016 at 5:56 pm
    Permalink

    the first time i saw R1 i sometimes could see it clearly but afterwards thought maybe it is also because I know this galaxy in and out and know the real actor died years ago. The 2nd time i saw it i tried to block that part and honestly there only two times its noticable sometimes a bit off (his first apearance, 10 seconds in or so, and at the end theres a shot, that couldve actually been deleted/not used). the rest felt natural, i spoke with some people who didnt know this was a dead person and they noticed nothing…

  • December 17, 2016 at 6:04 pm
    Permalink

    the only awkward thing was when he was speaking lines they would show his face, cut to someone else and then show his face back only when completing the sentence. while i understand the reasons and how hard it would be to create artificial lip movement for the whole monologue it felt kinda unnatural. usually in the movies when the character is speaking the camera’s fixed on his face throughout instead of rapidly cutting to other things in the scene. but I definitely appreciate the effort, it served the story well

    • December 18, 2016 at 12:27 am
      Permalink

      Make me wonder if they’ll bring back Alec Guinness for Obi-Wan’s spirit in EP8. The blue glow would help hide the effect even more,

      • December 19, 2016 at 5:12 am
        Permalink

        Why would they when they have Ewan?

        • December 19, 2016 at 11:40 pm
          Permalink

          Because spirit Obi stayed old looking.

          • December 20, 2016 at 12:36 am
            Permalink

            If only we had make up and special FX…

    • December 18, 2016 at 8:49 am
      Permalink

      well sometimes yest sometimes no. if a character in a movie is being affected by something the camera will stay on them, if the character is affecting someone eles the camera cuts to show you the reaction.

      tarkin was screwing with krenick with every line, he was twisting, pokeing, proding, antagonizeing, ect. When Tarkin says “i am takeing command” the important thing is not for us to see him say that but to see how krenick responds and how this influences his next action.

      you notice it here because we are all looking for chinks in the CGI armour.

      natural human eye movements when groups are talking are structured like that. you look at who is talking, check in with whoever they are talking too and look back at the speeker. unless you are being talked to in which case you look at your conversation partner,.

  • December 17, 2016 at 6:35 pm
    Permalink

    Great work, what I’m curious about is legal aspects, did they need permission from Cushing’s state? Since we will certainly be seeing more of this, what are the implications for this kind of work, let alone the ethics?

    • December 17, 2016 at 6:48 pm
      Permalink

      They got permission from his family and estate.

      • December 17, 2016 at 7:37 pm
        Permalink

        Thanks! Verified batman? So, you are the real Batman? :p

      • December 17, 2016 at 10:19 pm
        Permalink

        And there’s a special dedication in the credits to Peter Cushing, OBE…

      • December 20, 2016 at 3:04 pm
        Permalink

        I guess a big fat check with plenty of zeros helped.

  • December 17, 2016 at 6:50 pm
    Permalink

    I thought it was done extremely well with Tarkin i really didnt notice the effects. Now Leigh at the end, that I could tell was facke.

  • December 17, 2016 at 6:52 pm
    Permalink

    I saw Rogue One with my brother and a couple friends. NONE of them knew Tarkin was cgi. They argued with me about it afterwards when I said he was. They were so adamant about him being real, that they almost convinced me that I was wrong. I had to come home and do some research to re-convince myself that he was infact cgi.

    • December 18, 2016 at 12:25 am
      Permalink

      Mileages may vary.

  • December 17, 2016 at 7:04 pm
    Permalink

    Tarkin looked great. Leia didn’t but that didn’t affect the movie at all.

    Eye movement will be the next thing. Cushing and Henry’s eyes are different colors. Cushing’s are so water-blue and they didn’t move in CGI, took me out of it a bit but everything else looked great.

    • December 18, 2016 at 3:43 am
      Permalink

      I’ve heard a few people say Leia didn’t look convincing, but for me it looked just fine. However at the time of viewing, I wasn’t sure if they’d CGI’d Peter Cushing or just got an actor who bore a striking resemblence as it looks like him but not exactly like him. Close enough for me to be happy though. Darth Vader on the other hand…

  • December 17, 2016 at 7:10 pm
    Permalink

    A for effort, but it didn’t work for me. It took me into ‘Polar Express’ territory when his face appeared. The facial expressions looked animatronic, but the big tell was the eyes. Having said that, it was fun seeing him incorporated into the story, and I’m glad to hear the effect is working for most people.

    • December 17, 2016 at 7:13 pm
      Permalink

      Yes, it was in the uncanny valley for me as well. It’s still super impressive and I’m glad they did it, but sadly I don’t think it will age well.

      • December 18, 2016 at 12:24 am
        Permalink

        If it looks real to people now it will look real 10 years from now. Does it look real? Depends on who you talk to. Mileages have varied. But anyone who says it looks like a video game, I wanna see said video game that looks that real.

        • December 18, 2016 at 3:06 am
          Permalink

          “If it looks real to people now it will look real 10 years from now.”

          I don’t think it works like that. Whether we are aware of it or not, we are strongly influenced by the special effects we see in movies. Since we don’t see that kind of shit in real life (space ships, stuff blowing up), it kind of defines how it *should* look to us. That’s the case for fake faces too, because we get more and more aware of CGI capabilities over the years. So, if it looks just a little bit fake, you will think it’s real or fake based on whether or not you believe it is achievable by CGI. I think your brain just finds the easiest explanation based on what you know.

          Going back to older CGI triggers a reaction of “wow this looks bad”, even if we thought it looked great some years prior. Because since then, we have seen better CGI and our eyesight and knowledge of fake improved.

          I do think it will age bad as people will be more and more aware of CGI capabilities. To be honest, it looks fake to me even right now.

          I am still glad they did it though. Pretty great achievement!

    • December 18, 2016 at 8:41 am
      Permalink

      well. they used a real actor on set, and put tarkens face onto him like a mask. the eyes…. are a real actors eyes… literally the most real part

  • December 17, 2016 at 7:12 pm
    Permalink

    bah, too many “experts” saying that it looked cg. Dang, if I didn’t know that he was dead, I would have thought he’s a real actor.

    • December 17, 2016 at 10:37 pm
      Permalink

      I can only speak for my *own* complaints, but for me the problem was that it pulled me out of the moment.
      Perhaps it’s the whole “uncanny valley” effect, but just about every time I saw/heard him speak I was reminded he was computer generated.

      Re: “”experts” saying that it looked cg”
      Again, only able to speak for myself….but I do have a VERY extensive background in 3D animation. Working with Pixar software from the earliest days (Renderman, other tools), so maybe I’m even more sensitive to noticing the *defects* / things the appear artificial.
      Regardless, it pulled me out of the movie.

      Nobel effort, but (sadly) detracted from the film.

      • December 18, 2016 at 9:29 am
        Permalink

        well, I was referring to”experts”, not experts in the sector… I guess you folks can tell all times when a scene is fully cg, which elements are, and so on.

        • December 18, 2016 at 9:20 pm
          Permalink

          It could very well be that my background/experience with CGI, and CGI characters, coupled with knowing Cushing’s long dead, made me a bit hyper sensitive to the fact that he wasn’t *real*.

          Still feel that we’re just not there yet. At least for extreme closeups & lengthy dialogue sequences.
          Glad they’re working on this capability in feature films.
          Won’t be too many years before we might see a new Humphrey Bogart movie. 😉

    • December 18, 2016 at 12:22 am
      Permalink

      I think it looked better the 2nd viewing I just got back from? Did he look even better the 2nd time to anyone else?

      • December 18, 2016 at 9:27 am
        Permalink

        I still need to go watch again T.T

      • December 18, 2016 at 1:36 pm
        Permalink

        I have seen the movie 4 times so far and i get more and more comfortable with the effect everytime i watch it.

  • December 17, 2016 at 8:30 pm
    Permalink

    I understand people’s complains, but its still new technology. Trying things like this is the only way to eventually escape that uncanny valley. And Dang if they didn’t get pretty close! There were only a few moments that really broke the illusion. They should have kept the character a bit more stationary and the camera a bit further from his face, heck maybe have him appear as a hologram and circumvent the problem entirely. But I thought it was an amazing feat of CGI! If I can suspend my disbelief that a rubbery little green puppet is one of the powerful beings in the galaxy, I can probably believe that peter cushing’s Tarkin was alive with the most expensive CGI facelift in history.

    • December 17, 2016 at 10:34 pm
      Permalink

      Agree with the sentiment.
      Re: “I can probably believe that peter cushing’s Tarkin was alive with the most expensive CGI facelift in history”
      My problem was that, while I’m very good with suspension of disbelief, I just couldn’t manage it with Tarkin in Rogue One.
      [ Side note: I loved Rogue One ]
      It took me “out of the film”, instead of being in the moment & enjoying his scenes, I alternately thought:
      1) Wow, that almost looks like Peter Cushing’s Tarkin
      2) Wow, the CGI character looks *almost* real

      Similar with Leia.

      It was very *close*…but just not there yet.
      I think they should’ve used him much more sparingly. Reflection, from distance, side/turning, given less lines, etc. And then they could’ve pulled it off.
      I’m glad they’re trying this, but think some test audience runs would’ve told them it’s not ready for prime time just yet.

  • December 17, 2016 at 9:23 pm
    Permalink

    They accomplished an amazing feat and it served a crucial role in the film, but I’m not going to say the effect was perfect. It looked uncanny to me, although others I’ve spoken to didn’t even notice. Maybe it’s because I’ve been exposed to Cushing in the original film for most of my life, but I think it’s more that the texture looked a bit rubbery and the movements kind of robotic. People seem to have more of an issue with Leia at the end, but that shot actually didn’t bother me very much at all considering how brief it is.

    • December 17, 2016 at 11:08 pm
      Permalink

      Leia looked perfect. Tarkin was mostly great.

      • December 17, 2016 at 11:44 pm
        Permalink

        I actually thought the opposite but I still need to see it a second time.

    • December 18, 2016 at 7:03 am
      Permalink

      Strange use of “uncanny.”

    • December 18, 2016 at 6:13 pm
      Permalink

      For me, the only problem with both of them was the mouth. for whatever reason, their mouths just didn’t move quite right.

  • December 17, 2016 at 9:33 pm
    Permalink

    Rogue One was great, we have a new episode 3 – yeeeeeeeeeessssssssssss!
    Now for the Han Solo movie to leap like a frog over AOTC and give us a new episode 2. And when Obi Wan shows up in his own movie we’ll have a new episode 1 – yippeeee!

    • December 17, 2016 at 10:28 pm
      Permalink

      Why do you prequel hating trolls have to bring this up every time there’s an article on a new movie?

      We get that your lack of confidence in your own opinions has you feeling you need to constantly shout this irrelevant rubbish, seeking affirmation from fellow prequel-bashers.
      But it’s seriously tiresome & it speaks volumes about your mental state/faculties….and clogs up discussion forums, otherwise dedicated to…you know – discussing the actual article!

      Please – just stop!

      • December 17, 2016 at 11:08 pm
        Permalink

        Because they are lonely and sad

        • December 18, 2016 at 1:12 am
          Permalink

          Oh ffs lighten up, try removing your heads from your asses every once in a while. We do it, to draw out the hypersensitive and hysterical muppets – and you have the gall to suggest I lack confidence in my own opinions, I dunno, you people are just too easy.

          • December 18, 2016 at 8:59 pm
            Permalink

            So basically you’re admitting that you are just a troll & making irrelevant comments as “bait”.
            Thanks for letting us know so we can ignore your posts from now on.

            An honest troll….go fig’r.

          • December 21, 2016 at 7:46 am
            Permalink

            You can label me whatever you like, that’s what your ilk are all about, you do it to try and censor difference of opinion or anything you view as being negative because you want to live in a happy clappy flowery world where everyone only talks about things they agree on and where no one expresses dissenting opinions or engages in jest of any kind lest it offend or upset some poor sensitive soul.

            You’re just another of a noisy, dishonest, self righteous and arrogant set that presumes to speak for others and who thinks they can decide what’s relevant or not. You couldn’t ignore me if you tried, all I’d have to do is poke fun at one of your precious sacred cows and you’d be tearing into that keyboard with every ounce of your perennially on hand indignation.

          • December 23, 2016 at 10:42 pm
            Permalink

            You were trolling….and called out for it.
            Please *victim* all you like, but I’m glad your own words admitting you were trolling.
            Trying to raise a controversial/inflammatory topic & derail the conversation from the article/topic at hand & then trying to act upset you were accurately questioned about it.

            Don’t know if you were just trying to:
            1) Draw attention to yourself
            2) Start inflammatory comments/debate [pure troll]
            3) Receive masturbatory responses from other prequel haters
            Of some combination of those 3x motivations… regardless, please just stop with that behavior. It clogs up the forums & in no way relevant to the article.

          • December 24, 2016 at 2:39 am
            Permalink

            What happened to ignoring me? – no such luck I guess. Doug, lighten up, stop trying to police everyone, stop being so anal, skip your next march and go get laid instead.

          • December 24, 2016 at 2:47 am
            Permalink

            Why don’t you quit trolling forums with your irrelevant posts then?
            Guess that options off the table – no such luck with that plea.

            I know – go post how George Lucas ruined your life with the prequels on the article about Carrie Fisher’s heart attack today – I’m sure your “prequel bashing” troll haters will find that just as appropriate.
            It’s as relevant there as it was here.

          • December 24, 2016 at 3:15 am
            Permalink

            Ah DogP, what are you going on about now, forums aren’t trolled, individual perennially offended snowflakes are. Seriously man, go hack NASA or something.

        • December 18, 2016 at 6:12 pm
          Permalink

          Yes, because only sad lonely people could dare to have an opinion that differs from yours!

          FFS

          • December 18, 2016 at 7:13 pm
            Permalink

            Sigh. No, only lonely and sad people still whine about a movie from 17 years ago instead of moving on.

            Having a different opinion is fine, I welcome it because I don’t give a damn what others think.

            Having a vendetta and acting like a victim b/c a movie disappointed them is a mental problem.

            FFS.

          • December 18, 2016 at 9:34 pm
            Permalink

            This is a Star Wars website. About Star Wars movies. People are talking about Star Wars movies. Get over it.

          • December 18, 2016 at 10:57 pm
            Permalink

            haha, telling me to get over it when people needlessly go out of their way to cry about a movie that’s old enough to vote is hilarious.

            I needed that laugh. Ahhh, good times.

            “Get over it” is right.

          • December 19, 2016 at 12:53 am
            Permalink

            So it’s only annoying when they do it.

            Good to know.

          • December 19, 2016 at 5:06 am
            Permalink

            You have missed the very basic point of this entire exchange. I won’t waste my time anymore. Good day.

          • December 19, 2016 at 6:32 am
            Permalink

            “You’re right, and I don’t like that.”

            Good day, I guess.

          • December 19, 2016 at 5:14 pm
            Permalink

            Still missing it. If you can’t see the difference, then no point in furthering this discussion.

            People should get over a 17 year old movie or we should get over an hours long comment that was needlessly trollish about movies not even being discussed in this thread.

            Yeah, same thing. You are right. *eye roll*

          • December 19, 2016 at 11:38 pm
            Permalink

            Considering the fact that Star Wars fans have been whining about the prequels for over a decade now, you should probably be used to it. You know what most mature adults do when they see a comment they don’t like? They shut their mouths and keep scrolling.

          • December 18, 2016 at 9:10 pm
            Permalink

            TUD,
            Re: “opinion that differs”
            My complaint has NOTHING to do with a *different* opinion.
            You’ll notice that I didn’t even express my opinion, nor did Uncle Deadly, about the prequels.

            The issue is the trolling/baiting behaviour …it’s very tiresome.
            People bring up the prequels in completely irrelevant articles….just to bring them up.

            Again, neither of us said anything about our opinion of the prequels, but question the motivation/intent of people who continually post these unrelated ramblings.

          • December 18, 2016 at 11:00 pm
            Permalink

            Yep.

            I myself find much of the prequels to be subpar, but I don’t go out of my way to bring it up.

          • December 19, 2016 at 12:54 am
            Permalink

            Well Rogue One is a Star Wars prequel, so talking about other Star Wars prequels isn’t that irrelevant, is it?

          • December 19, 2016 at 3:59 am
            Permalink

            Re: “Well Rogue One is a Star Wars prequel”
            Stretch much?

            Re: “isn’t that irrelevant, is it”
            The article is about CGI.
            The OP went on a ramble about – “oh my gawd… finally erased Ep3…now need to erase Ep 1 & 2!”…. & you somehow find that RELEVANT?!

            Yes, it is irrelevant to the article & completely out of place. Purely insecure, inflammatory, ranting – to draw attention or draw-out the prequel bashing trolls.

          • December 19, 2016 at 6:33 am
            Permalink

            No, it’s not a stretch. Rogue One is a prequel to Episode IV, is it not?

          • December 19, 2016 at 7:35 pm
            Permalink

            Re: “No, it’s not a stretch”
            Yes, it’s a stretch.
            To claim this is relevant to the article, which is about how Rogue One brought character back using CGI, is stretching the topic to the point of breaking.

          • December 19, 2016 at 11:36 pm
            Permalink

            So Rogue One isn’t a prequel, then? Because last time I checked, it’s a prequel.

          • December 19, 2016 at 11:41 pm
            Permalink

            Re: “So Rogue One isn’t a prequel, then?”
            Are you being intentionally obtuse?

            So this article is about the topic of prequels and not about CGI then?

            Last time I checked, it’s an article about how CGI was used.

            Next up…. Look forward to your justification for mentioning Caravan of Courage or the Holiday Special every time a new article is posted. Thank gawd Ep 1 through 3 replaced those in our memories, eh?!

          • December 20, 2016 at 12:03 am
            Permalink

            Well considering the fact that Rogue One is a Star Wars prequel thanks for still not acknowledging that btw), I’d say it’s relevant enough. I’m sure you wouldn’t be complaining if this person were singing the prequels’ praises, that’s for sure.

          • December 20, 2016 at 12:19 am
            Permalink

            Re: “thanks for still not acknowledging that btw”
            Because stating that isn’t relevant to my point/the topic at hand (similar to OP – you two seem to have that in common, in your quest to bash-prequels & sideline the conversation).

            Re: ” I’m sure you wouldn’t be complaining if this person were singing the prequels’ praises, that’s for sure.”
            “that’s for sure” – wow, certain you are?!
            Based upon what exactly, definitely not the likes of: facts/evidence.
            Realizing facts/evidence don’t get in the way of your prequel-bashing knee-jerk reactions, it wouldn’t matter to you that I’d find someone injecting – “omg …the prequels are the best thing ev’a!” into a topic about Rogue One’s use of CGI as also completely irrelevant.

            Seriously, you prequel-bashers should go find an article that’s about the prequels so you can have a circlejerk over how bad they are.

            Then leave the forums about completely different topics…. to be ABOUT those topics.

            If you keep up with the mental gymnastics you’re going through to call this *relevant* to the article, you’re going to sprain your brain.

          • December 20, 2016 at 12:27 am
            Permalink

            “Seriously, you prequel-bashers should go find an article that’s about the prequels so you can have a circlejerk over how bad they are.”

            When did I bash the prequels?

          • December 20, 2016 at 1:19 am
            Permalink

            Re: “When did I bash the prequels?”
            Most recent, it seems was several weeks ago.

            Claiming the prequels are intolerable?

            TUD: “Imagine the prequels redone with good dialogue, effects, and directing. they might be tolerable.”

          • December 20, 2016 at 4:20 am
            Permalink

            So you literally had to search though my old posts to find comments from at least a month ago. And you took the time to do it. That’s sad tbh.

          • December 20, 2016 at 6:04 am
            Permalink

            Re: “literally had to search though my old posts”
            Omgosh….gasp, yes, I went through the extreme effort (at your urging, mind you) of:
            1) clicking on your name
            2) hitting CTRL-F (find) & typing the word “prequel”
            Yes indeedy, that moment took me nearly as long as it probably took you to write the post implying you *don’t* bash the prequels.

            Re: “That’s sad tbh”
            What’s *actually* sad is the pain you must suffer through cognitive dissonance.
            How you leap from topic to topic, justification to justification, trying explain away why bringing up & bashing prequels is somehow relevant to the topic of CGI in Rogue One, or implying the someone who says “why bring up prequels in this context” is attacking a different opinion, or drifting further & saying you ‘know’ (incorrectly) that I’d someone praise an irrelevant post if it were “pro” sequels, to bouncing around further afield with your “gasp, me?! when did I ever bash prequels” (& not expecting to have evidence produced).
            All in an effort to justify irrelevant prequel bashing/forum trolling on a topic of CGI. That’s sad, tbh.

          • December 20, 2016 at 6:43 am
            Permalink

            >is on an article about a Star Wars prequel
            >doesn’t like it when people talk about Star Wars prequels
            > …?

          • December 20, 2016 at 6:49 am
            Permalink

            Being deliberately obtuse/misleading/misdirecting….also sad tbh.

          • December 20, 2016 at 6:26 pm
            Permalink

            >no u
            >why are we still here tbh

      • December 18, 2016 at 4:31 pm
        Permalink

        If you like crappy movies that’s your business. But nobody forced you to respond to him and defend those bad movies.

        • December 18, 2016 at 5:43 pm
          Permalink

          between average movie (what honestly prequels are – despite the expectations of hardcore fans) and crappy movies, there’s a gap. better phrasing is needed when you criticize something who can be argued and debated

        • December 18, 2016 at 9:06 pm
          Permalink

          Re: “If you like crappy movies that’s your business”
          That’s the funny thing, I didn’t say ANYTHING about liking a movie or not.
          Project much?

          What I complained about is trolls posting about the prequels in a completely unrelated topic forum.
          That they have to bring up the prequels in almost any context.
          The most likely reason, from psychological studies on this type of behaviour, is they possess a lack of confidence in their own opinion & are constantly seeking affirmation. And/or – they just like posting inflammatory content to draw attention to themselves. In either case, doesn’t say anything *good* about their motivations/intent/mental state. Regardless, it clogs up discussion forums, such that we don’t wind up talking about the actual article.

          Re: “and defend those bad movies”
          I’m not certain if you’re just trolling me, or of a similar mindset as the OP. But how could you possibly interpret (reading comprehension issues?) what I wrote a “defending” those movies?
          Again – I was speaking about the behaviour or trolling forums with prequel bashing, following completely unrelated articles.

          Sheesh…

          • December 19, 2016 at 1:06 am
            Permalink

            Are you finished?

          • December 19, 2016 at 3:55 am
            Permalink

            Re: “Are you finished?”
            Is that how you admit you were wrong in claiming someone was defending a crappy movie?

          • December 19, 2016 at 10:03 pm
            Permalink

            Okay, NOW are you finished?

    • December 18, 2016 at 2:56 am
      Permalink

      Booooh !

      • December 18, 2016 at 10:10 pm
        Permalink

        Phew, I guess I’ve had a lucky escape 2 or 3 downvotes – that’s just nasty.

    • December 18, 2016 at 4:31 pm
      Permalink

      Nah. I’m not a big Prequel fan, but I don’t want to see them eliminated from canon or anything. They’re part of the story now. And I most certainly don’t want to see an Obi-Wan movie.

      • December 18, 2016 at 6:11 pm
        Permalink

        I believe he meant that in a metaphorical sense.

  • December 17, 2016 at 10:15 pm
    Permalink

    Also, the reason Leica was so bad was because her line was so corny, the original Leica has sass.

    • December 18, 2016 at 12:21 am
      Permalink

      She just said “Hope” it wasn’t about having sass with one word. She didn’t have sass with every word spoken anyway,

      • December 22, 2016 at 5:50 pm
        Permalink

        Episode IV after all is called “A New Hope”…

    • December 18, 2016 at 6:11 pm
      Permalink

      She literally said one word.

    • December 19, 2016 at 5:11 am
      Permalink

      Leia was perfect. If you think “hope” is corny, then all of Star Wars is corny.

  • December 17, 2016 at 11:41 pm
    Permalink

    I think the problem with Tarkin could be fixed really easily. His detailing was just ‘slightly’ too ‘sharp’ – and his skin was a little too ‘saturated’. Blur his textures by 1% and mute his colors just a tad – and he’d be spot on.

    • December 18, 2016 at 12:20 am
      Permalink

      Here’s the thing, none of us are good as John Knoll

    • December 18, 2016 at 8:51 am
      Permalink

      Screw it; ILM should fire their TDs and lighting/rendering leads and replace them all with you. “Blur his textures by 1%” (◔_◔)

    • December 18, 2016 at 1:33 pm
      Permalink

      This made me chuckle xD

  • December 18, 2016 at 12:28 am
    Permalink

    Will the spirit of Alec Guinness’ Kenobi likeness be in EP8? The spirit glow can hide the effect even more.

    • December 18, 2016 at 1:26 am
      Permalink

      Uah didn’t thought about this one! would be amazing….

    • December 18, 2016 at 6:10 pm
      Permalink

      I didn’t even think about that!! Man, I hope so. We heard those rumors a little while back about Yoda appearing in episode 8, so what is the ghosts of Yoda and Obi-Wan appear an the movie?

      • December 19, 2016 at 6:18 am
        Permalink

        Again, Guiness, the guy who freaking HATED Star Wars – that’s the guy you’re talking about posthumously forcing to appear in Star Wars movies. TUD, man, how does this not make your skin crawl?

        • December 19, 2016 at 6:32 am
          Permalink

          Because if his estate agrees to it, then I’m fine. He’s dead, so he literally couldn’t care less. Call me selfish. That’s perfectly fine with me. I guess I’m not as much of a big-hearted person as you are. And I don’t mean that sarcastically, in case you were wondering.

          • December 19, 2016 at 8:25 am
            Permalink

            Appreciate it, but I don’t think I’m being big hearted, I just find this a really dangerous way to commodify actor, particularly when we know pretty confidently that he would never have agreed to participate in this hypothetical film.

          • December 19, 2016 at 4:34 pm
            Permalink

            I can definitely see that point of view. The legal implications must be tricky.

        • December 20, 2016 at 2:26 pm
          Permalink

          If a big fat check with the right amount of zeros is to be handed over to his estate for their consent, they wouldn’t give a damn to Sir Alec’s feelings.

  • December 18, 2016 at 1:43 am
    Permalink

    When I got that first glimpse of Tarkin as a reflection, I was thinking this is all we’re going to get. But then they show him, and yes he looked a bit off, but I could care less. He looked amazing and his presence in the film was crucial. I knew he was fake because I grew up watching Star Wars in the 70’s and knew he was dead, but also knew that a great number of people watching would have no idea that he was CGI. Leia looked even more CGI than Tarkin, but again, I could care less as she looked amazing regardless as well.

    • December 18, 2016 at 3:48 am
      Permalink

      I agree they both looked great, and I think a lot of the people who say they knew it was CGI so it took them out of the moment etc wasn’t down to shoddy CGI but because they know Carrie Fisher is old as sh!t and Peter Cushing is dead so that’s what interfered with their consciousness.

      • December 18, 2016 at 6:09 pm
        Permalink

        I agree. My mother and brother (who I saw the movie with) had no idea that Tarkin was CGI until i told them. They only knew Leia was CGI because they had juts seen Carrie Fisher in TFA.

      • December 18, 2016 at 9:16 pm
        Permalink

        Re: “they know Carrie Fisher is old as sh!t”
        Carrie was in her late 50s shooting TFA.

        I think it’s as much a factor of *mileage* as it is age. 🙂

    • December 19, 2016 at 6:54 pm
      Permalink

      The expression / phrase is “couldn’t care less”.

      Search your feelings, you know it to be true.

      • December 20, 2016 at 4:38 pm
        Permalink

        Grammar Police – 1

        Bob the Jedi – 0

  • December 18, 2016 at 9:04 am
    Permalink

    Had to push back my tickets, so just got back now – really feeling they just should have recast. The effect was fine, I mean, sure it’s a digital character, but for what it was it was very well executed. The ethical and moral implications completely aside, it was matched up with voice work that just didn’t sound as whole lot like Cushing. Since I’m already being pulled out of the effect by that, I’d have preferred just to see it done the old fashioned way. Similarly, spoilers, I guess? although, again, the effect was fine, I was totally okay just seeing her from behind. Couldn’t placce where they stole Carrie’s ‘Hope’ from – I feel for sure I’ve heard it before though.

    • December 21, 2016 at 12:53 am
      Permalink

      It’s a different voice actor, not Carrie’s voice.

  • December 18, 2016 at 2:45 pm
    Permalink

    After the film, I told all of my friends that I watched with that Tarkin was done with CGI. They didn’t believe me until I searched it up online.
    I could notice it, but I guess that’s because I knew it beforehand since Peter Cushing is dead.

  • December 18, 2016 at 4:36 pm
    Permalink

    I thought the inclusion of Tarkin was masterfully executed. Was it perfect? Nope. But it was really, really dang close. I’d imagine as the technology further matures, we’ll see Tarkin touched up and fine-tuned for future home viewing releases. I’m fine with that. For as much as I want the OT left completely alone, I could care less if Lucasfilm heads in to tweak any of the modern films.

    Watching Rogue One led to an interesting beer session topic afterwards. Does this blow the doors off of resurrecting dead stars for movies? Will there be another Bogart fllm? Will John Wayne star appearing in westerns again? Tarkin was used fairly sparingly, but in a few years, this technology might be able to convincingly cast a long-dead actor in a lead role.

    • December 18, 2016 at 6:25 pm
      Permalink

      Sounds like it too a long time to do. Maybe in the next decade? I’d like to see an Obi-Wan film with Guiness back and MacGregor doing the voice.

      • December 19, 2016 at 6:15 am
        Permalink

        Guiness – the guy who loathed the franchise, wanted nothing to do with it, and yelled at little kids who came up to him to say hi. THAT’S the guy you want to see re-created in a SW movie. This seems like it should be an object lesson in the problems implied by using the technology this way.

        • December 19, 2016 at 2:29 pm
          Permalink

          Guiness was known to have had some rough moments in his elder years, but I’m not sure the incident of him scolding the child happened more than once. That being said, if this happened, we’d be seeing a young Obi-Wan, not a young Alec Guiness. There’s an article link floating around social media that gets into some of the legal ramifications of resurrecting dead actors in this way.

        • December 20, 2016 at 6:38 pm
          Permalink

          That he did but his greedy offspring would probably okay it.

      • December 19, 2016 at 2:25 pm
        Permalink

        I’d imagine now that the technology exists, it’ll only get easier to work with. Although I’m sure that sort of thing requires a level of patience that far exceeds mine.

        • December 20, 2016 at 6:40 pm
          Permalink

          For sure but even so I never figured he would get nearly as much screentime as Krennic. I see feature length films like this within ten years or less.

  • December 18, 2016 at 6:22 pm
    Permalink

    THIS is how you utilize CG. I hope they are remembered come awards season. A truly remarkable achievement considering how rough the effect looked in Tron Legacy and Genisys.

    • December 18, 2016 at 6:30 pm
      Permalink

      I only seen the film twice but it seems like Tarkin got more screentime than Krennic too. Was it Stanton who voiced him? I thought he did one of the best acting jobs as well.

      • December 18, 2016 at 8:39 pm
        Permalink

        And the Oscar for Best Actor in a Supporting Role goes to…Peter Cushing…err…Lucasfilm.

        • December 20, 2016 at 8:10 pm
          Permalink

          That would be both amazing and hilarious. This hasn’t been the best year for performances as is anyway.

  • December 21, 2016 at 10:01 pm
    Permalink

    Just saw it…the Cg Tarkin looked far from convincing to me…like something out of a digital animation. I think the actual actor plus a little cg/make up would have been better than the full cg character. I think the de-aged characters in other movies looked better I.e. Antman but I still enjoyed the movie

  • December 31, 2016 at 1:44 am
    Permalink

    I take back my original comment. Or at least 90 percent of it. I’ve seen the movie three times now (god, what a classic) and Tarkin now totally works for me. I spend almost no time worrying about his CG and more on listening to the actual dialogue and his role in the plot by scheming against Krennic, which is perfection.

Comments are closed.

LATEST POSTS ON MOVIE NEWS NET